Parallels is just weeks away from releasing version 3.0 of its Mac virtualisation suite, beating VMWare to an offering with 3D GPU emulation built-in. Parallels says high-end Windows games will now be playable within a virtual machine There are some other features included too, like the ability to associate any file type in Mac OS X to open in a Windows app, and vice versa.
Post a Comment
Member since:
2007-05-03
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:2006-02-04
I was with you there for a second but then I thought about our own experience so far with Parallels. The company I work for recently started in earnest to develop for the Mac. We have a number of clients who use Macs requests for a native Mac version have increased lately.
In the mean time, we have serval people who are using Parallels and we have been using it as well. To be perfectly honest, 2.0 has not quite met our expectations. Our primary complaint is it's ability to handle data over serial connections but aside from that, the software has been a bit troublesome (buggy, crashing to the point where I have to kill the process).
If 3.0 solves our problems, then great, we'll bite the bullet. But then again, paying money for bug fixes makes it feel a bit too much for paying for a beta, not a finished product. At least I can just demo 3.0 to see if it is worth the upgrade.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:2006-02-04
Member since:2005-08-11
Member since:2005-07-06
Considering the significant feature addition, I think its reasonable.
Its no more "unbelievable" than Apple's sudden hardware upgrades or any other company's.
I imagine there was a significant investment of labour to implement this functionality.
Member since:2006-01-02
How do you expect them to pay developers to develop the new version? You either you pay for each version or you pay a Red Hat et al. style service fee that entitles you to updates as long as you are subscribed.
Those of us that bought Parallels before Christmas get free updates for a year...
Member since:2005-07-07
Member since:2005-07-06
"Parallels Inc is offering $10 off the normal upgrade price to existing registered users of Parallels for a week only, bringing the cost down to $US39.99 ($A48.28). After this time, upgrades will cost $49.99 and full licences will cost $79.99. It will give the upgrade away free to customers who purchased Parallels after May 1, 2007."
Member since:
2005-07-01
This sounds fab and I've already pre-ordered my upgrade.
If this get Winders GL games running in Parallels it will be worth a lot more than 40 USD.
The Parallels devs deserve the money even if they didn't get this (3d) into three, and I'm pleasantly surprised to see 3D and snapshots both make it in.
Any beta testers have the scoop for us, discretely?
Member since:2005-07-06
Yea, I'll readily fork over the upgrade charge if this lets modern games run on my Mac. I mean, seriously, this is the "last mile" for folks who may not want to run on a mac.
The Mac already runs World of Warcraft, so I've been content, but it will be nice to open up other options.
On the other side of the coin, this could also be the final nail in the arguments for game companies to make Mac ports of anything.
I'm not worried about office or personal apps, Macs have lots of those. But now game companies can legitimately punt on the whole problem.
So, it's a double edged sword.
Member since:2006-02-04
I don't know about that. I'm inclined to think that companies would want to have native ports due to speed issues. Sure Paraells is quick on its feet, but it's not going to quite meet native speed because it can't quite take advantage of what native code can offer. Maybe that's just wishful thinking.
I think WOW would be a great test. On the same machine do some performance tests to see how it runs natively and how it runs in Windows using Paraells. Hopefully I will have the opportunity to do this test in the near future.
Anyway, if I bought a Mac for personal use it would be great if I could run my Windows only games.
Member since:2005-12-15
Member since:2006-03-14
Actually I think the 3D support in Parallels would hurt the Mac gaming scene rather than help it. Think about it, you'd still be playing PC/Windows games and if we're content with that, where's the incentive for game developers to make native Mac games?
A consumer level Mac computer such as the iMac probably wouldn't be enough to run demanding games, never mind doing so in a virtual machine. However, developers could produce eye-candy in a game that's optimized to run natively in OSX.
Member since:2005-11-10
Not everybody is going to buy a £160 Windows licence, and then Parallels, just to play games on Mac.
Parallels 3 shows there is solid demand for games on the Mac - one way or another. Game companies will see that such demand exists and it will improve the chances of native games being produced.
Member since:2006-01-09
Member since:2005-11-10
Where does Joe user purchase an OEM copy from a shelf, such as how they buy the games they intend to play?
Playing games in VMs is a limited subset of users with a copy of Windows, and Parallels / Fusion.
There's better hope for Cider / Wine / Ports.
---
OEM edition is the same as retail but comes without box, and can only be bought online with the purchase of memory or hard disk.
Edited 2007-06-01 17:46
Member since:
2007-04-26
Member since:
2006-08-18
Member since:
2006-07-16
Just a side commentary... while it's fantastic that 3D support has been added to Parallels (and soon to be added to VMware)I can't help but be amazed that so much effort goes into getting games working on computers. Why are games are so important to people? I grew up in the 80's and have witnessed Atari, Nintendo, Sega Genesis, etc.; all the way up to today's Wii and Super Nintendo released to great fanfare. I can honestly say I never touched a joystick after the Atari / Commodore 64 fell out of vogue. I don't play board games or card games either. I've always found myself too busy with other interests to bother with games.
Member since:2007-03-02
As the saying goes "there is no work without play". Although i have found that i only play games on consoles these days. I find having a better, more stable os outweighs being able to play games on my pc. Also with consoles i know it will last me 5 years without needing to replace/upgrade it.
Member since:2005-07-06
Why do people read books? Watch movies? Watch TV? It's entertainment. It's a hobby. For some, a serious hobby. That's why it is important to get games working on various platforms.
It's important to people, therefore companies are interested because where there's interest, there's potential revenue to be generated.
Member since:2005-07-06
Member since:
2005-07-06
Member since:2005-07-06
How does it compare to Codeweaver’s Crossover?
Good question. How fast would a completely virtualized OS running, say, Office 2003, as opposed to WINE running Office 2003?
I imagine WINE would still be faster, if by only a little bit. With something like Office 2003, I doubt the difference would be significant, but with games, it could be a fair difference.
Member since:
2005-11-14
I wonder if the free upgrade counts if you purchased through the apple store or if you had to buy it through the parallels website specifically. I just purchased a black Macbook and a copy of parallels 2 weeks ago tomorrow and parallels hasn't even arrived yet (damn ups, I wish they'd sent it all fed.ex.).
Member since:
2005-07-06
I have used all virtualization software available in the Market and I have not found a single one that is not buggy, expensive and limited.
I know that virtualization is a dream and a noble feature, but no one did it the nice way except for vmware with their Server barebone metal version (ESX).
Try ESX with sun or Dell or HP servers and you will understand the difference.
Member since:2006-08-15
Member since:
2005-11-15
Parallels on Mac already provides the best desktop VM experience available today.
I think this is because the desktop VM is their core business.
Others have had years to improve their desktop VM offering, especially regarding graphics acceleration and desktop integration and they have not delivered - they are more interested in Servers.
Member since:
2006-11-10
can do now Direct X 8.x then why is it better then VMWAre Fusion that can do DX 8.1 as well? I am using Fusion simply because it allows me to move my virtual machines from my server to my MBP when I travel and then back to the server when I am home. This way I always have my working Virtual Machines with me. Fusion has most of the Parallels features already and allows you to open multiple Virtual machines at the same time which, last time I checked was nearly impossible on Parallels. Fusion is, as of now, Free so a perfect compliment to the free VMWare server.
So why is this such a big deal? I don't get it.
//Flosse
http://blog.2blocksaway.com
Member since:
2005-11-16
Member since:
2007-04-03
Member since:2007-05-01
Member since:
2006-05-29
Consider that the vast majority of Macs sold have far too slow GPUs for actual PC games, so safe your money if you have an Mac Mini, Mac Book, or the small iMac, since these mashines aren't powerfull enough anyway because the GMA950 can't compete with a seven year old GPU.
Only buy if you have an Power Mac with a decent graphics card... or because you don't care for games and are after 2d / low end 3d apps / 3d apps from before 2000.
Member since:2005-11-10
Member since:
2007-03-29
I got a refund after V2 just didn't work for me and I got no support. I'm not bitter though, I got my money back and I would be willing to try Parallels again if they actually hire people to support the product.
Is the Parallels forum still full of people who get zero support or has it improved?